Similar
Stories
Content from our friends over at Walkable Dallas-Fort Worth
Monday, January 11, 2010
Main Street Garden in Dallas lacks cohesion
A good urban square should remind us what is so great about cities, about urban living.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
I've been promising a review of the new Downtown Dallas Park, Main Street Garden, for a while now -- well, eventually living up to my word, here it is. With visual aids! Now let's play show and tell.
While it is great to have a new and substantial green space in Downtown Dallas that attempts to do something more than mask a freeway, Main Street Garden's primary strength is simply that it is a park. The amount of effort against inertia required to bring it into existence is a tremendous achievement in itself, especially when you realize that certain people wanted to put a parking garage below it. 1) Downtown has TOO much parking and if you don't realize that, unfortunately, you shouldn't be making decisions regarding any downtown anywhere. 2) L.A. tried to put parking under Pershing Square and the curb cuts and ramping system off the entrances doomed the park in the same manner that AT&T Plaza originally failed because of the bus shelters in front of it until its recent redesign. These elements created visual AND physical barriers. Cities are creations of interconnected webs creating positive synergistic effects. This is why a poorly constructed or rundown building in downtown is still more valuable per square foot than newer or better buildings that lack a synergistic "quilt."
However, the design of the park's greatest weakness, which is debatable as I'll get into, is that it is trying too hard. It is over-programmed, which is something that I, and every single person that I've talked to, have commented. It looks as if somebody went on a supermarket sweep shopping spree through landscape architecture magazine, replete with a bizarrely placed, Martha Schwartz-y earthen mound (which I'll also discuss in a bit).
I want to first discuss some of the general issues before showing and discussing some of the more trivial design details which may or may not exist in 20 years as we adapt the park to better suit our needs.
Frankly and foremost, it has too much stuff in it. The best program of any urban public space is the people; letting people define how it can best put to use for their own needs. Many of the best urban squares and plazas in the world are actually quite barren, until they are full of people. This is why so many roman piazzas have become parking lots and why many of the piazzas turned parking lots have reverted seamlessly back to piazzas.
I find the root of such over-programming or over-designing stems from a self-conscious lack of confidence, from the designers or the city officials which are largely indicative of the collective feeling of the community they represent. It's a natural tendency. The fear is no one will use it, so the design and in turn, the park, end up with a cafe, a dog park, a hill?, child's play area, a fountain, a metal wire Christmas tree (?!), doilies, doodads, and follies that will probably end up in a scrap heap or reused in a private garden someday.
Lesson: Show some restraint. It's a park in a downtown of none.
As for some of the more worrisome elements of the park, these actually have less to do with what is inside the park itself (although that is not completely off the hook), but with its immediate adjacencies and connections.
As I've discussed many times, cities that work are a collection of many things, each contributing in the creation of a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts. This comes from the interface between buildings, uses, and conduits (aka streets) typically. When this machine that is "space" is orchestrated properly (purposefully or accidentally) it generates an energy, which induces what I call "urban magnetism." Notice the best places in the world can draw more people to them than it can physically support in terms of full-time residents.
Both building design and conduit or street design is critical in the creation of magnetic spaces, because if either is overly flawed they can each become barriers diminishing the multiplier effect of the regularities of urbanity. In the case of Main Street Garden, it unfortunately has one terrible street, two bad streets, and one good street forming its boundary. Commerce would be the terrible street, with its five one-way lanes offering a quick escape. Yay for congestion relief!
My specific worry about the park is that the interrelation between the adjacent buildings and streets to the park is only a visual one rather than also being a physical one. To improve this park down the road, we will need to scale down each of the bad roads currently enveloping it by ensuring wide sidewalks protected by street trees and on-street parking as well as eventually converting the one-ways to two-way. Furthermore, I would specifically recommend that Harwood be bricked between Old City Hall and the park to create a "plaza"-like feel and a physical connection between at least one of the buildings and the park. This would maintain bollards, defining the traffic flow between building and park which could be shut down during special events.
As for the park itself, along the wide or north south sides of the square, I feel like the planting, the terracing, and the fencing create unnecessary buffering effect as well. I know the streets are bad, particularly commerce, but perhaps we shouldn't be so afraid of them to completely turn our back on them. This isn't the creation of Central Park at the height of industrialism and tenement housing. We're not trying to completely escape the city, nor create a central "lung." A good urban square should remind us what is so great about cities, about urban living. It must be welcoming and inviting on all sides. At the end of this post, we'll look at a similarly scaled park that redesigned itself to become one of the great urban squares in the country, if not the world.
Before getting to the photos and the details, I want to get one more petty, aesthetic difference off of my chest. Once in a while, can we please refrain from the arbitrary plan view geometries? Peter Walker does his concentric circles, as with the next downtown Dallas urban square Hargreaves does his faux alluvial patterns (even though there is no water), Martha Schwarz does her psychodelia, in Main Street Garden we get very sharp angles, which could be fine, except for two things.
First, most of the great parks of this scale in the world have some symmetry to them. In the world of urban design, it is okay to copy. It's called empiricism and using what works, which has been proven through the ultimate of tests, time. Being different for the sake of being different is the sometimes scourge of both architects and landscape architects, as Bill Hillier writes, "sometimes with experimentation, you can be wrong." In this case, humans prefer order, symmetry. I'm all for some crazy shapes and experiments in design occasionally, but those are best suited within the context of urban art. This is a public square. Design for the public, rather than littering the world with your own self-referential aesthetic. Very baby-boomerish.
Second, a lack of symmetry or the arbitrary selection of angles and axes can lead to oddball pieces and a general lack of cohesion. I'm sensing this is partially why the overall park feels disjointed, lacks cohesion, and is over-programmed. As you'll see with the comparison at the end, a similarly-sized park has a good deal of programmed elements but one finds them within the imposed order and hierarchy created by the formality. Taking a conventional hierarchy and arbitrarily skewing the angles is post-modern which is why Main Street Gardens feels cluttered. We left the '90s ten years ago, along with our over-sized blazers, shoulder pads, awful sweaters, flannel shirts, ripped jeans, doc martins, birkenstocks, and post-modernism behind. Now is the time for something more hopeful, more optimistic, more purposeful.
---------------------------
Sorry for the personal side trip into the world of pet peeves. On to the imagery and details:
Excuse the low quality. This is iPhone imagery.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
Okay. First of all, you might get a sense of the clutter here. And perhaps, the nature of child play areas and their acid-tripped designers lends to that. But, does the cafe area have to look like an abstract alien from War of the Worlds eviscerating all those who dare dine beneath it? What is with the thirty plastic support columns? This looks like it is from the scrap heap of rough drawings of patio furniture.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
The earthen mound. Or as we like to call them in Dallas, Grassy Knolls. Or it might be if the sod carpeted around it would ever take root. But it won't because the slope is too great, as with Martha Schwartz's plaza in Minneapolis, which have never really grown grass well, and are, well ... dirt mounds. But piles of dirt are fun for kids to roll around on, and we saw this in Landscape Architecture magazine, so let's throw one of them in here, even though it is completely contrived and arbitrary and has nothing to do with glacial formations.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
My favorite part. These green things, which I suppose are to keep parents dry while they force their kids to play in the rain and roll around on the mud hill. Only problem is these things don't cover the benches they are above, nor will they cast shade during the summer sun. Oopsie. Play, you stupid kids, PLAY! Or I'll lock you in the refrigerator again to give me some peace and quiet!
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
From inside the dog park. I don't care for the metal benches of choice, especially when we see some of the other benches in the park. Also, you get some disconnect between Commerce and the park in this image via elevation and fencing. Is a dog park really needed here? I've used it, but I can also easily go to the much larger one under the freeway where, like all dog areas in the city, they never have any baggies.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
Fountain. Fine. I'm sure the marble slabs have something to do with something or other. Still better than the (forgive me) turds in the toilet fountain at One Arts Plaza.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
I love the hardwood benches and patio as well as the crushed gravel walk.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
I'm all for follies in a park, but these? I have a hard time seeing how people can find usefulness in these.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
Your guess is as good as mine, but somebody sure is proud of that banding, I'm sure.
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
Two things. This sign has no place in the park. First, it is hideous. Second, do we really need a giant blinking sign stating "park" while looking like it is advertising a parking garage? Were the grass and trees not a hint to us mongoloids?
Photo by Patrick Kennedy
This is what I mean by the sharp angles and skewed lines. We get leftover pieces like this. What to do with it? Uh, I dunno boss, let's throw some stupid plants in and a big ol' blinky sign to distract 'em with the bright lights and all.
Pegasus News Content partner - Walkable Dallas-Fort Worth
Related stories
Nearby stories
- Transit Bicycle Co. relocates to Lower Greenville
- Creepy rendering of Big Tex shows he's almost ready for the State Fair
- Photos: Dallas Heritage Village Charleston'd its way through history on Saturday
- Paleo-inspired restaurant HG Sply Co. opens May 21 on Lower Greenville
- Dallas Symphony Orchestra maestro is selling Ritz home for $2.9 million
Faved or commented on by...
Related events
Latest Contests
Latest comments...
UPDATED: Craft brewing overhaul gets final approval
Sorry, but I don't suffer fools gladly. Have a nice day.
Dallas-based Pecan Lodge is Texas Monthly's second-best barbecue joint, sort of
It's good and the hoi-paloi likes it, so the stiffs who insist on "redecorating" Dallas to suit thei
Plano will reconfigure unpopular median left turn at Preston and Legacy
"What should have been the solution from the very beginning is to have Preston be an overpass over L
Tracy Yost, verified:
Totally agree with you re: the sign. If people can't tell that it's a park, and you have to have a large gawdy blinking sign that says "park".... from down at Pearl and Commerce, it looks like some kind of construction sign....
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
texrunner, anonymous:
Wow, this park looks terrible. It's very cheap looking and lacks an identity. It looks like someone went to Ikea and bought some random stuff because it was on sale.
Is there any actual green grass in this park big enough to actually enjoy. When I think of an urban park, I visualize lots of grass where people can run and catch frisbees or play catch. Why does every space in this park need to be filled with some architectural piece of junk?
Think of Fountain Mall in DC, Boston Commons, or Central Park - those places aren't filled with random crap and let the public define its space (as the author already noted). Yes we don't have the acres, but that gives it even more reason to not include so much stuff in such a small space.
If the city had to put something in the park, it should have added useful things: a basketball court, tennis court, a pavillion, etc. Plus that playground does not look very inviting for kids - reminds me of the art pieces from Beetlejuice. The one good thing is that the current crap does not look very durable. Hopefully someone with actual park planning experience will be in charge in 5 years when that stuff breaks down.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
jaredwht, anonymous:
It might be beneficial for people to know why certain elements are located in the park. I am referring to the "park" sign and the "banding" referenced in the article and photos above.
The "park" sign was once the "parking" sign for the Gold Ring parking garage that was located at the corner of Commerce and Harwood. The sign was saved and integrated into the overall design of the park to add interest and serve as a reminder of what was once there.
The "banding" set near the corner of Main and Harwood used to be the cornice pieces for the buildings that once stood at that location. Again they were integrated into the park for similar reasons.
Whether or not these elements are liked or deemed appropriate for the park is a matter of personal taste, but the sign and cornice pieces do have some significance since they were once part of buildings removed to construct the park.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Travis Bush, verified:
Any project or concept is going to lack cohesion right there..The old Hilton hotel stands empty and still dominates that area, simply by its size. I like that park for what it is and appreciate knowing about the pieces that were integrated into its design.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
DC, anonymous:
Dear Dallas:
Shall I presume skateboarding in this supposedly public place is illegal?
Sincerely
DC
The DC
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Tracy Yost, verified:
Jared - thanks for the info re: the "historical" significance of the sign, that does make somewhat of a difference.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
lanternattic, anonymous:
First, design is a very subjective topic. That said, if you don't like something, that's fine........eveyone has the right to thier own opinion. There are many, many other people in Dallas that absolutely love the park. What I will suggest is that if you are going to make comments about something, you need to understand WHY it was done before simply making offhand, uninformed remarks. When you do not understand what you are commenting on, unfortunately your comments come off like some wannabe "Architecture" critic. The program for this park was established well in advance of the design with input from the Citizens of Dallas through public meetings and by the primary stakeholders, not the least of which were the DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS themselves. Personally, I love the park and it is a fresh change from other more "traditional" public spaces in the world. It is a fantastic addition to Downtown and the City of Dallas a a whole. Kudos to Mr. Balsley and the entire City Park and Recreation Department for a GREAT job!
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Tracy Yost, verified:
lanternattic, said:
"First, design is a very subjective topic. That said, if you don't like something, that's fine........eveyone has the right to thier own opinion." Thanks for confirming that.
"What I will suggest is that if you are going to make comments about something, you need to understand WHY it was done before simply making offhand, uninformed remarks."
Offhand? Really? They're just comments. Get over it.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
lanternattic, anonymous:
Hey "textrunner".........what do you call that great, big green area in the middle of the park? Maybe I'm mistaken, but that looks a lot like grass to me.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
lanternattic, anonymous:
Offhand........yes. Nobody from this publication even bothered to call the designer so as to better understand the logic behind the design, so yes I would call the remarks offhand and uninformed. Writing about something in a public forum brings responsibility to tell the entire story.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Tracy Yost, verified:
Do you think everyone who visits the park should have to call the designer to understand the logic of the design?
Another "offhand" comment - I think the design should stand on it's own, and that people shouldn't have to call up the designer and say "what the eff were YOU thinking?"
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
patrickjkennedy, anonymous:
First, it is a citizen's opinion piece.
I thought I was pretty clear that the ephemera within the design was understandably subjective and worthy of debate. However, considering if even the informed aren't picking up on the "reuse" of signage or banding which is really just more plan view patterning, then 99.99% of the people aren't going to get it. A little signage or interpretation maybe??
While there is a meta-narrative to tell, converting parking facilities into parks, negative into positive, it isn't apparent or tangible.
Or perhaps, some histories are left forgotten.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Bill Holston, verified:
I recognized the Park sign. I thought it was a clever use of a somewhat iconic image. In other words, I liked its tie to history, and thought it was a clever preservation of the sign. I haven't spent time in the park yet, but I love the idea of it.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
dfwcre8tive, anonymous:
Every day and night (even on the coldest days) the park sees families with children, dog walkers, artists, etc. Think back a few years ago when the block was full of homeless camp parking garages along desolate streets. Now the open space provides vistas to the great surrounding architecture and extends life to the east end of downtown.
There's still a lot to finish in the park, but what is there now is great. Once the cafe opens; furniture is placed under the garden shelters; interpretive signs are installed and the grass is open to walk on (it's growing roots right now and roped off)... then it will see even more life than there is right now. I think there is a good balance of open space and active areas.
Each planned park for downtown is designed for a special purpose. This park is going to be heavily programmed to make it the main gathering spot downtown.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Tracy Yost, verified:
I definitely prefer "park with odd sign" to "homeless camp parking garage". Also love the lavender holiday tree :-)
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
David Gates, verified:
I spent an hour or so there last month. Seemed just kind of weird and not very park-like. And "that great, big green area in the middle of the park" was not very great, big OR green. But I'll give them an 'e' for effort. Trying to compare a square block to Boston Common or Central Park is just ridiculous.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
texrunner, anonymous:
I only brought up Boston Commons and Central Park as a point of reference that most people can relate to (I even acknowledged the fact that we don't have the size to come close). My issue with the park is the over-abundance of stuff in such a small space. A better comparison are the small community style parks in Boston or London (a good example is in the movie Nottinghill Hill).
I realize a lot of this is going to be about personalized taste. I am not a fan of the style of architecture that was used for the new opera house, but I think it looks great. I just hope the city does not go overkill with that style. Many of the downtown buidlings were constructed in the 1970s and 1980s and a lot of the government buildings reflect that style. In my opinion, those buildings are an eyesore and lack style (like the Kennedy Memorial/Plaza, "new" courthouse, and Reunion Arena).
By the looks of this park and the new design of the convention center and science museum in victory park, it looks like Dallas is again going overkill on a different, more modern architetural style.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
lanternattic, anonymous:
Hi folks...........for anyone that would like to read "another viewpoint" on this park, I would stongly suggest reading the article on it and review in the recent edition of TEXAS ARCHITECT. This magazine is published by the Texas Chapter AIA and is not associated with Landscape Architecture, except as related professions. Also, there will be reviews upcoming in other design magazines, such as LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE and others. I think you will find the reviews (and opinions) will be a little different than those offered by Mr. Kennedy. Additionally, every single person I've talked with is thrilled about the park. Read the other articles and then decide for yourself. In the meantime.....ENJOY our new park!
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
lanternattic, anonymous:
Hi texrunner.....I agree, modernism evokes stong feelings, either for or against. While I love Main Street Garden, I cannot say the same about the new Convention Center Hotel. I love modernism done well, but I am also a FIRM advocate of historic preservation and maintaining the unique character of an area, be that a downtown district or even a single building. I do think modernism gets over used sometimes, but when it is done well, it is awe inspiring. I guess the trick is merging the styles in a seamless manner........quite a challange.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
lanternattic, anonymous:
One more supplement to "texrunners" ideas and then I will shut up....
I am totally in agreement that attempting to cram a lot of elements or uses into a tight area is very tricky. It must be done carefully. While some of us might argue that there is "too much stuff" in the park, each of the uses or program elements were carefully selected based on needs and desires of the Citizens of Dallas during the design process. For what it is worth, the upcoming BELO GARDEN to be built at the other end of Main Street is a much more passive park in both design and elements (or lack thereof!) incorporated into it. Hopefully it will complement Main Street Garden and the much more "packed" and programmed Woodall Rodgers Deck Park, under construction now.
The point is..........we are getting parks in Downtown Dallas and that is fantastic for all of us.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
DC, anonymous:
Dear Downtowners;
So, no skateboarding?
Also, DALLAS IS NOT NEW YORK GET OVER IT OR MOVE THERE AND SHUT UP
Thanks
DC
The DC
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Clay213, anonymous:
Did the guy who wrote this just move to Dallas?
What a pretentious blowhard article. Not that I should be surprised by something written by a guy from 'living as smug as possible in Dallas'
That sign is the best part of the park. 'Do we really need a sign to tell us it's a park?'
Wow you seem dumb.
Not that any of this matters since just like every other public space in this country it will soon be used by no one except drug addicts and homeless zombies.
PS: What the hell happened to the design of this site?
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Jason Rice, verified:
Clay!?! Clay!
Hey everybody - they found Clay's cryopod and reanimated him!
::DALLAS IS NOT NEW YORK GET OVER IT OR MOVE THERE AND SHUT UP
And if I find myself agreeing with both Clay and DC, then it's either the Apocalypse or dead obviously true. (Or both)
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
jtmbls, anonymous:
OMG!! Clay! They let you out of prison already?
Let me be the first to wish you a seamless re-integration.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Phillip Wilkinson, verified:
I'm with you Patrick on this about fifty percent.To me it seems like someone still stuck in the new wave 80's."Sometimes less is more" Haven't we already grown out of that yet? It's great to change something but to go over board is just saying I have this budget and I'm gonna spend it somehow.Open check book closed mind.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Teresa Gubbins, staff:
yay, clay is back!
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Phillip Wilkinson, verified:
O K I'll bite,who is this short timer Clay?
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Jason Rice, verified:
Clay is the guy that bikes through downtown kicking puppies, spitting on homeless people and evading Public Lewdness charges by sleight of hand and legislative loopholes....
...oh, and Jtmbls' on-again-off-again fiancee
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
jtmbls, anonymous:
Emphasis on “off-again!”
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
nickynick, anonymous:
I browsed through this guy's website, and the impression I got is he wants to leave. He has a feature called "cities where I'd rather live" and each entry has lots of pretty pictures of those cities.
If you'd rather live there Mr. Kennedy what is stopping you from going?
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Jason Rice, verified:
::If you'd rather live there Mr. Kennedy what is stopping you from going?
Um... look at unemployment numbers and cost of living for all those much cooler places. (tee hee)
Maybe one should bloom where one is planted.... and by composting your surroundings, the blooms will be all the sweeter.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Alex Bentley, staff:
Patrick posted a follow-up on his site, which is worth reading as we cut out his comparison to New York's Bryant Park.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Jason Rice, verified:
Now Alex. Bringing even-handedness never led to a mutli-hundred-comment thread, has it?
Please keep this "journalistic fairness" nonsense to yourself and let the ex-equine flogging run its course.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
jtmbls, anonymous:
Yes Alex. Why would you interrupt our clay bashing for something productive?
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Sarah Blaskovich, staff:
Adding insult to injury, Main Street Garden also doesn't sell beer and Funyuns on Friday afternoons.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Mike Brown, anonymous:
The Guy that wrote this article is an idiot. The thing that is over done is not the park; but, the over analyzed article written of it.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
alexander troup, verified:
I worked on that event an opening and the folks who set that thing up are gone...left town or just went to another money maker....it has big dreams but, you have to get to work on a dream or it will dry up or get torn up......soon.......great place for a art shows or something concert, keep working on the facts to move this place in a positive direction and get rid of the hype......Bye... A/T, Urban waltzer on ice....
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Jason Rice, verified:
::that wrote this article is an idiot
Mike - I think you'll find friends here. Welcome ;o)
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
bigdhouses, anonymous:
I think with the UTD Law School taking over the old City Hall building and hopefully the old Statler Hilton becoming dorms/low cost apts, the Park will become more of an urban park or "university "quad" than the crazy quilt it is now.
Dallas rarely gets it right. 1. Building the jail on what everyone knew was going to be the Trinity Lake back in the 80's! 2. Letting Wendy Reeves totally subvert her "minor but nice gift" to the DMA by making them build a replica of her home complete with her shoes and keys positioned stratigically on the stairs to nowhere. 3. Letting ATT dismantle the George Ricky kinetic sculpture across from the downtown NM and give it to smu! That sculpture was second only to the the Henry Moore City Hall sculpture in importance. The rest of the City's public art is laughable.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
zaneology, anonymous:
What are your credentials and what background info did you gather on WHY they did any of the things you wrote about?
I did not find the way you relayed your version of this park to be anything more then uninformed snark. I believe everyone has every right to their own opinion, but when you share it, you have a responsibity to relay true facts that led you to your opinion.
I would have taken you more seriously if you did not have errors and omissions over-dressed in your personal perception.
Is the MSG park perfect? Maybe not, but my family enjoys it. Was this post perfect? Maybe not, but I am going to assume that more people find benefit with and enjoy the MSG park than they did this opinion piece...
...and, that is just my opinion as well.
Good Luck to you.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
What do you think?